From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor_Boskovits?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] gnu: Add Cookiecutter and its inputs Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:56:34 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20191003074527.jnz4lbjgpbp46b5v@rafflesia> <20191003113957.alhsisxxt5unle5a@rafflesia> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a15ec3059400471e" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39158) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iFziz-00075c-6u for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 07:56:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFziy-0004Ni-0U for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 07:56:49 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x543.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::543]:46948) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFzix-0004N9-PS for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 07:56:47 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-x543.google.com with SMTP id t3so2134660edw.13 for ; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 04:56:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20191003113957.alhsisxxt5unle5a@rafflesia> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Tanguy Le Carrour Cc: Guix-devel --000000000000a15ec3059400471e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, Tanguy Le Carrour ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont: 2019.= okt. 3., Cs, 13:39): > Hi G=C3=A1bor! > > Thanks for your answer. > > Le 10/03, G=C3=A1bor Boskovits a =C3=A9crit : > > Guix patches is a patch review queue. Feel free to post them there. > Please > > post the cover letter first to open a new issue, and post the rest to t= he > > assigned issue number. > > I've just figured out that one could submit the package AND its > dependencies in one patch [1]. Is it easier to review than sending > 4 different patchs/emails?! > > [1]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D35752 > > You can see in the second letter of the thread that keeping the patches separate is preferred. > Also, I tried (but failed) to put the packages in alphabetical order, > so they are scattered all over the file. Would it be better to have them > side by side? > I don't believe this to be a big problem. It should be ok. > Regards, > > -- > Tanguy > Best regards, g_bor --=20 OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:CF63:0B21 --000000000000a15ec3059400471e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,

Tanguy Le Carrour <tanguy@bioneland.org> ezt =C3=AD= rta (id=C5=91pont: 2019. okt. 3., Cs, 13:39):
Hi G=C3=A1bor!

Thanks for your answer.

Le 10/03, G=C3=A1bor Boskovits a =C3=A9crit :
> Guix patches is a patch review queue. Feel free to post them there. Pl= ease
> post the cover letter first to open a new issue, and post the rest to = the
> assigned issue number.

I've just figured out that one could submit the package AND its
dependencies in one patch [1]. Is it easier to review than sending
4 different patchs/emails?!

[1]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi= ?bug=3D35752


You can see in the second letter of th= e thread that keeping the patches separate is preferred.
=C2= =A0
Also, I tried (but failed) to put the packages in alphabetical order,
so they are scattered all over the file. Would it be better to have them side by side?

I don't believe this = to be a big problem. It should be ok.


Regards,

--
Tanguy

Best regards,
g_b= or
--
OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:C= F63:0B21
--000000000000a15ec3059400471e--